Call-in design philosophy - backwards?

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2014, 13:57 PMBasilone

The vcoh system of doctrine tanks was perfect. Doctrinal tanks for NO fuel but very costly in manpower. Also limited to 1 at a time. I don't think doctrinal medium tanks should be restricted to one at a time, but the heavies should. Then people will use these heavy tanks to supplement their mid/later game tanks rather than spamming them in replacement of them which is very boring and a big reason why I don't play the game very much.

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2014, 14:19 PMTrainzz

This is the problem, tbh.

In CoH2, you have to decide whether you go for doctrinal units or "regular" units, because both of them cost fuel. So obviously, everybody will take the stronger, more cost efficient unit over the weaker one.

By lowering / removing the fuel cost on the call-ins, and in return increasing the manpower cost, you could get your regular units while also calling in a doctrinal one.

I guess the call-in units need some power adjustment then, but in general, this is the easiest way of achieving a variation of doctrinal and non-doctrinal units while maintaining a healthy game flow.

The only problem is that you are then even more forced into using the doctrines that have these call-ins, as you are otherwise probably at a disadvantage.

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2014, 14:19 PMTrainzz

This is the problem, tbh.

In CoH2, you have to decide whether you go for doctrinal units or "regular" units, because both of them cost fuel. So obviously, everybody will take the stronger, more cost efficient unit over the weaker one.

By lowering / removing the fuel cost on the call-ins, and in return increasing the manpower cost, you could get your regular units while also calling in a doctrinal one.

I guess the call-in units need some power adjustment then, but in general, this is the easiest way of achieving a variation of doctrinal and non-doctrinal units while maintaining a healthy game flow.

The only problem is that you are then even more forced into using the doctrines that have these call-ins, as you are otherwise probably at a disadvantage.

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2014, 14:26 PMGiaA

So you want that fuel becomes useless during mid late game as it did in vcoh ? kewl

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2014, 14:28 PMNinjaWJ

Not really. If you balance out the core units to be viable then we shouldn't see so many people just pick a specific doctrine for that clal-in.

Giving just MP costs to call-ins while perhaps upping the CP cost would drag out the mid/midlate game. I think this is a healthy change. More strategy will be involved instead of everyone just saving up for the super tank.

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2014, 14:30 PMIpKaiFung

I'll still just wait for call ins because they are way better than standard units and also cost less with regards to tech costs.

Hi 2 U Mr. Tiger Ace

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2014, 14:34 PMInverse

I really don't see them making commander-specific units less cost-effective than base faction units. It completely goes against their business model and the fact that their design philosophy revolves around adding variety through commanders. In vCoH doctrines/companies were supplementary to base units because the base factions had a lot more variety than they do in CoH2. In CoH2, it's the commanders providing that variety, so it makes sense that they want commander-specific units to be more attractive than their base counterparts. You can like it or hate it, but it's not going to change.

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2014, 00:21 AMbutterfingers158

I think that for Soviets especially, but also possibly for USF and OKW, you need to be careful with this. Soviets are not designed to get all 4 tiers, so saying that Guards only come with a T1 limits strategies. This would be extra punishing for call in tanks, as both Soviet T3 and T4 cost 120 fuel, meaning you couldn't use T-34/85s with SU-85 back up or an ISU with T-34/76s.

USF is also encouraged to tier skip, getting either Lieutenant or Captain. Thus stuff like Paratroopers, Greyhounds, or Wolverines should be either have Lieutenant or Captain + CP gate.

OKW can skip tiers, but they generally seem to get all 3 in a game. Their tech is also the cheapest.

Jump back to quoted post10 Sep 2014, 17:33 PMInverse

When CoH2 was in alpha/early beta, all commander-specific units had to be built from tech structures. The main problem back then was these commander-specific units replaced existing units instead of simply adding to the number of units you could create. For instance, Guards and Shocks replaced Penals, the upgunned T34 replaced the stock T34, etc. That was an imperfect solution because it ended up limiting your options; if you didn't have enough fuel for the upgunned T34, you were essentially screwed, since you couldn't produce the cheaper, weaker variant at all.

The problem with call-ins in general is they're extremely boring when they're used as a core strategy rather than simply a supplement to base units. They're a lowest-common-denominator means of adding diversity to the game, but they're core to the commander model. If they want less people to rely on call-ins and commander-specific units, they're going to have to make the base factions more interesting. I'm sure they'd rather just release more commanders.

Jump back to quoted post11 Sep 2014, 19:44 PMPedro_Jedi

Well, I do think that for the heavies (IS2, ISU, Tiger, KT), the most simple and pressuring solution would be limiting 1 per game. That way, u add tension - the player with the heavy will be very cautious, while the other one will be pressured into a bold attitude while trying to destroy it.